Observation through multiple points of view, first lesson, they must learn to become the other, the user, and create the storytelling of an experience concerning reality, before any other kind of research
to clients, customers, staff, collegues and all other stakeholders. Real listening requieres tranquility, self-convidence, empathy, cautious interrogating, impartiality and many more valuable skills. People often come up with solutions too fast - a bit more listening/understanding would help..
I would turn the question around: What should educators learn from design thinking. Or rather, how can education put the students center stage. Which sounds very logical, since education is all about the students, but in practice most institutions are extremely top down organized and orientated.
When institutions start thinking and working bottom-up, they will need to develop new way of involving and activating students. It's not just about what they should learn, the organizations and systems should be changed and re-designed around the desired outcomes from the student point of view. Actually starting to facilitate the students.
I also think that the student should be the center of the educational insititute. Unfortumately, most often they are not. At my institute I initiatied an Student Experience research poject in order to get a real understanding of the student experience as input for further decisions in curriculum innovations.
Students are not at the center and can't possibly be at the center. Schools are not structured in such a way. Their structure looks like a pyramid (much like most commercial organizations). And, bottom-up does not mean turning a pyramid upside down... that can't be done ;-) As a pilot project it could be interesting too see if a "wisdom of the crowds" cloud-shaped approach could function within an educational institute.
Peter, that sound very interesting! Can you share more information about your project?
And of course, I do agree that it is all about the students! And in fact, there are some motivated, young teachers doing a quite good job - of course, there are others too - I know.. However, I think we need to differentiate a little more: It is about WHAT they learn and HOW they learn:
What students learn.
I doubt that students are the right people to be asked what they should learn. How should they know, what they need in "real" life? It is still education! And although they are grown-up and all that, most of them never really worked. So, we need to raise this question to those who are working: What are the skills you realy need? What of the stuff you have been tought is now really useful for you? What's not?
How students learn.
Well, that is the questions we definitly need to ask them! Students nowaday learn different than only 10 or even 5 years ago. ICT is changing so fast, that we constantly need to adapt to it. At my institution we are putting a lot of effort to integrate new methods. Rather learning together instead of simple teaching. Wikis, eportfolios, problem based learning, case studies, online tutoring, etc.. Still, we need constant feedback and change to keep up with this!
Marc, Arne. I truly believe that a school is for students. Ofcourse schools also have a qualifying function and deliver professionals to the labour market, but we shouldn't underestimate the function of personal development.
Similar to customer marketing, it is of no use to provide bad experiences to students. That's why we should investigate the student experiene. Not to let them dictate what curriculum we should offer (we as educators are the professionals to do that) but in order to adapt to their needs and values.
And indeed, education has renew itself to be prepared for the 21st century so it makes more meaning to younger generations.
I think that an educational institute has to find its balance between control (in order to finance and manage resources) and creativity (being aware of and adapt to the dynamics of the industry). Together with a colleague I am preparing a paper on this topic for DesignEd2009. We believe that all our graduates in multimedia design should be educated with the basics of design (in which they look alike) but als should have developed an attitude to sense the dynamics in the industry themselves in a more personal way (as if they were a personal brand).
Companies in our industry acknowledge that they don't seek graduates that are interchangeable but that they are looking for 'personalities', people with their specific vision on the field and on the role they can play in that.
So, in our curriculum, we try to give personal freedom (choosing your own topics) to students within a context defined by us teachers. That's how we try to keep flexibility and creativity in control-happy institute.
Peter, somehow I just managed to read your reply now.
I highly appreciate the approach of your institute and I agree with that immediatly. Especially that you are referring to your students as a kind of brand (from a personality point of view - don't get me wrong..) is great. What are your experiences with this? From my own experience, only few students are motivated enough to add that extra work (adding their personal note to a thesis/project/etc.). That is in fact one of the most interestig questions we'll end up with: How do we motivate them? or what motivates them? Hoe can we support motivation?
the design thinking question involved in this discussion is: Why should the students bother to learn anything schools want to teach them? One single thing can present teachers teach: the limits of reality and conventional education: memorization, universal laws, authority, pyramidal structure.
I am sure we are all familiar with Six Sigma and Jack Welch. I personally believe that we should understand best practices in Industry to have a better appreciation of Design Thinking.If we go back in history Deming went to Japan and took them to a…Continue